Zephyr Ridge Observatory Bloghttp://www.blog.deepskyguy.com
Sharing the experience of operating a private astronomical observatorySun, 05 Feb 2017 22:51:35 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.4Stephan’s Quintethttp://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2016/07/07/stephans-quintet/
http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2016/07/07/stephans-quintet/#commentsFri, 08 Jul 2016 00:41:01 +0000http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/?p=139Continue reading →]]>I have posted an image of Stephan’s Quintet in Pegasus, acquired with my Obsession and Mallincam Universe CCD camera. See the bottom image on this page.This is a famous compact galaxy cluster, and is listed as HCG 92 in the Hickson Compact Groups catalog of 100 such groups.The data for the image were acquired in 2014 and 2015, and the result is composed of 983 frames, each of 10 seconds duration.As I have previously noted, I am challenged by an altazimuth mount and no guiding with my dobsonian reflector, and so am limited to very short exposures.

Here is a labelled version of the image.

As a general statement, Stephan’s Quintet is a group of interacting galaxies.For example, NGC7318A and NGC7318B are clearly performing a cosmic dance.One peculiar aspect of the quintet, however, is that NGC7320 is really not a true participant, as it resides some seven times closer to us than the remaining galaxies and simply happens to be in the line of sight near the true members of the group.(One source gives the distance to NGC7320 as 40 million light years, whereas the other members are roughly 290 million light years away.)But, all is not lost if one wishes for five members in the dance, as there is some evidence that the relatively lonely NGC7320C may in fact be tidally connected to the group.

The Hickson catalog contains many excellent visual targets, especially for medium to large aperture telescopes.Stephan’s Quintet is not the easiest nor the most difficult member of the catalog, and I recommend trying your luck this coming fall.Below is the log of an observation I made in 2009 at Zephyr Ridge Observatory under less than ideal conditions using my 20” Obsession at 212x magnification:

“There is flat triangular asterism of three stars that anchors the group.I first came to NGC7319 and NGC7320, just south of the asterism.NGC7319 appeared as a faint glow which degraded as I viewed (conditions may have been deteriorating slightly during this observation).NGC7320 is larger and exhibited a stellar nucleus.West of this pair, I saw a fuzzy patch containing two stellar pinpoints which were doubtless the stellar nuclei of NGC7318A and 7318B.A little SW of that pair, I saw a small smudge next to a star which, with averted vision, also contained a stellar nucleus.This was NGC7318.So, I identified all five galaxies.”

Hmmm.I failed to mention NGC7320C.Perhaps I will follow my own advice and take another look!

Denis

]]>http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2016/07/07/stephans-quintet/feed/1by w4l3XzY3http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2015/11/23/ngc891-image/
http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2015/11/23/ngc891-image/#respondMon, 23 Nov 2015 16:42:16 +0000http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/?p=131by w4l3XzY3
]]>http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2015/11/23/ngc891-image/feed/0Two New Imageshttp://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2015/05/05/two-new-images/
http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2015/05/05/two-new-images/#respondTue, 05 May 2015 17:06:04 +0000http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/?p=120Continue reading →]]>Greetings.I have posted two new images that I captured with my Obsession and Mallincam Universe At Zephyr Ridge Observatory. (You need to scroll to the bottom to see the latest images.)

NGC457, the so-called Owl Cluster in Cassiopeia, is a well-known target for visual observers and is an easy target for astrophotography.I integrated 383 exposures, each of 10 seconds duration, to achieve the final result.The data was acquired on November 15, 2014.I used Pixinsight for all processing.

The second image is a far more challenging venture.The primary object is NGC3718, a distorted spiral galaxy also known as Arp 214.Very likely the gravitational disruption of NGC3718 is due to the companion galaxy NGC3729 (seen at the bottom of my image), which is located a mere 150 thousand lights years from NGC3718.The two galaxies are about 52 million light years from Earth.To the right of NGC3718 is Hickson 56, a cluster of five interacting galaxies that are about 400 million light years from Earth.

My image is the result of integrating 1244 exposures, each of 10 seconds duration, taken over four nights in April, 2015.It took a great deal of effort to acquire and process this many exposures, and yet the result is not as revealing as I had hoped.I was unable to capture the faint, swirling extensions of the spiral arms in NGC3718 that is seen in other images, although a faint hint can be seen in my image in the direction of the Hickson group.

I think this result highlights the limitations of my setup.Since I have restricted my exposures to 10 seconds to minimize the consequences of poor tracking (for astrophotography) and field rotation, the result is subject to more camera read noise as well as noise from the sky background.Perhaps adding more data would improve the result, but a tracking system that allows for longer subs is clearly needed for such a challenging object.I processed the image three different times, trying different approaches in each, but was unable to improve upon the result posted here.

Denis

]]>http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2015/05/05/two-new-images/feed/0NGC2403 Imagehttp://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2015/03/12/ngc2403-image/
http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2015/03/12/ngc2403-image/#respondFri, 13 Mar 2015 01:11:29 +0000http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/?p=113Continue reading →]]>I have finished an image of NGC2403, a fine galaxy in Camelopardalis, and have posted it in my gallery.This galaxy is a member of the M81 group and is approximately 8 million light-years distant.There is a bright emission nebula and open cluster within the galaxy that has its own NGC number, NGC2404. I reproduce my image here with the location of NGC2404 indicated.

This image is my most ambitious effort yet with my Obsession dobsonian.It is composed of 1221 subs, each of 10s duration, for a total of 203.5 minutes of total exposure.The images were captured on February 14, 15 and 16, 2015 at Zephyr Ridge Observatory. I used Pixinsight software for processing.

The data for this image were acquired on August 24 and 27, 2014. I encountered some difficulties during processing as some of my subs exhibited an unusual red glow that caused bands in the final integrated image. I am not sure what happened to these subs, but after much trial and error, I found a way to use most of them in my final image thanks to the power of Pixinsight image processing software. But, I still had to discard 176 of the 800 subs I acquired (each of 10 seconds duration). Most of these were not suitable due to blurry/elongated stars that result from unguided exposures on a dobsonian mount. And with the considerable field rotation I experienced during the duration of these exposures, I had to crop most of the field away. The end result is not up to the standard set by those with equatorial mounts with autoguiding. But, my humble collection of images demonstrates that it is possible to achieve reasonable results with a dobsonian telescope.

Denis

]]>http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2015/01/20/ngc7331-image/feed/0Fireworks Galaxyhttp://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2014/11/26/fireworks-galaxy/
http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2014/11/26/fireworks-galaxy/#respondThu, 27 Nov 2014 00:08:34 +0000http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/?p=103Continue reading →]]>I am starting to process a backlog of image data, and I have just posted my latest effort, which can be found at the bottom of my images page. It is an image of NGC6946, the so-called Fireworks Galaxy. I acquired the image data during July and August of this year, and used Pixinsight to process the data.

I think it is my best result so far. As I have stated previously, astrophotography with a dobsonian telescope is difficult. I limit myself to 10 second exposures due to the limitations of my drive system, the lack of guiding capability, and to minimize the effect of field rotation. In this case I integrated 840 images, which certainly put pressure on my computer!

]]>http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2014/11/26/fireworks-galaxy/feed/0An Overdue Posthttp://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2014/07/11/an-overdue-post/
http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2014/07/11/an-overdue-post/#respondSat, 12 Jul 2014 00:48:22 +0000http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/?p=93Continue reading →]]>It has been nearly three years since my last post. During this time Zephyr Ridge Observatory has remained in operation, and I have continued my efforts in visual observing. I will write more about this in a future post. The purpose of this post is to call attention to a new Images page for this blog (see link at the top, or just click here.)

Early this year I acquired a new Mallincam Universe color CCD camera and I have been trying to make use of it. I had some initial problems which turned out to be computer-related, but now I think the system is working. So, I have entered the difficult realm of astrophotography, and am doing so with a telescope that is designed for visual astronomy. My Obsession telescope does have a drive system, but an altazimuth mounted dobsonian limits me to very short exposures due to field rotation and lack of a system for guiding. On the plus side, I enjoy excellent optics and a 20″ diameter mirror.

I have uploaded two images, and am currently processing some others. I will continue to add to the gallery as time goes on.

Denis

]]>http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2014/07/11/an-overdue-post/feed/0October 25, 2011 Observing Report – Sun Pollutionhttp://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2011/11/17/october-25-2011-observing-report-%e2%80%93-sun-pollution/
http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2011/11/17/october-25-2011-observing-report-%e2%80%93-sun-pollution/#respondFri, 18 Nov 2011 01:42:52 +0000http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/?p=59Continue reading →]]>In between travel and other obligations, the remaining windows of opportunity to visit Zephyr Ridge Observatory this fall were thwarted by bad weather. But, finally, I was able to make a trip there from October 24-26 when the forecast was favorable.

Indeed, the sky was clear and everything seemed set for a nice couple of evenings exploring the late autumn and early winter sky. On the first night, I decided to take a nap after dinner and begin observing after midnight and continue until dawn. Over the years I have been gradually observing the so-called Herschel 400, and I had only 15 objects remaining on the list, and these would be visible during the two hours preceding morning astronomical twilight.

As I prepared my telescope around 1 AM on October 25, I examined the night sky and noticed that the stars did not seem to “pop” like they usually do, and the Milky Way seemed a little muted. Everything was there, the sky seemed otherwise quite clear, but it just did not look as dark and transparent as I normally experience. I took measurements with my Unihedron Sky Quality Meter and obtained values of around 21.00 mag/arcsec2, which is quite a bit lower than the 21.50+ readings I get on the better nights at Zephyr Ridge Observatory.

The first suspect in such instances is atmospheric moisture or high clouds. I cannot discount this entirely, but it seemed unlikely given the weather conditions and my experience there. How about smoke from a large forest fire? I knew of nothing happening during that time, although there was a forest fire two months earlier some 30 miles away; surely smoke from this fire had long dissipated. I certainly did not smell smoke, and there was one night two years ago in which I did smell smoke from such a fire, and still had a better sky than what I saw on this night.

The less transparent sky persisted throughout my two-night stay. I observed from 1 AM until dawn on the first night, and from dusk until around 9:30 PM on the second night. I quit rather early on the second night due to fatigue and the fact that the sky was just not dark enough to pursue some of the faint galaxy clusters I had intended to observe.

When I returned home I did some investigation and discovered that on the very day (10/24/11) of my arrival at Zephyr Ridge Observatory the earth was hit by a coronal mass ejection of the Sun, which caused aurora that were visible throughout the United States, even in areas that rarely experience such displays. I had no idea about this while I was at the observatory, and I rarely spend time looking to the north, as my roof obstructs most of the northern sky. I think I experienced the negative effects of the aurora on deep sky observing, without thinking to try to enjoy the opportunity of observing the aurora itself!

It seems I need to monitor both earth and space weather in planning future trips to Zephyr Ridge Observatory.

I provide my observations below. One object of particular interest, which I failed to see, is one that may be unfamiliar to most readers: Gyulbudaghian’s Nebula. This is a so-called variable nebula whose brightness varies with the brightness of the variable star (PV Cep) that illuminates the nebula. It is a fascinating object, and this was my first attempt to see it. As I remark below, not only did I not see Gyulbudaghian’s Nebula, but I also failed to see PV Cep itself, even though I was quite sure I was looking in the correct location. Perhaps my effort was thwarted by the Sun’s hiccup, or perhaps PV Cep is quite dim now, or both. I have tried to find recent observations online, and have so far been unsuccessful. If anyone knows more, I would appreciate hearing from you. I will certainly try this object again some day.

Denis

Observations

All observations were made with a 20” f/5 reflector, unless otherwise noted. Due to the low altitude of several objects, I also used a 4” Borg refractor to be able to see above the south wall of the observatory. As noted in the discussion above, sky transparency was less than optimal for this site. Seeing was steady.

I first scanned this group at 212x, but more detail was seen at 363x. I was able to see all five members of the group. I keyed off of a small equilateral triangle of stars, and just to the north of this triangle I saw IC5369, appearing as a small fuzzy spot, rather faint. Further NE from there is IC5370, which was a little brighter and appeared to have a stellar nucleus. Along the same line to the NE, I found IC5373, which was fainter than IC5370, and also had a stellar nucleus. Moving to the NW from IC5373, I encountered a widely separated NS pair of stars, and the southernmost star had a tiny fuzzy spot just off the star to the NW, which is IC5372. Moving north to the other star in the pair, and then NW from there, I saw another very faint galaxy, IC5371. Overall, this group was quite faint, no doubt made more so by the less dark sky this night.

Quite a difficult group. At 363x, NGC3 was located just NE of a fairly bright field star. The galaxy was moderately faint, with an elongated halo. Slewing to the NW, I encountered a very faint hazy spot that was located where NGC7837 and NGC7838 are located in close proximity. I could not distinguish two separate galaxies, but only saw a single hazy glow. From there, I slewed roughly WNW and found NGC7834, which appeared as a tiny, elusive hazy spot just east of a field star. I was unable to see any other members of the group. I think this observation was affected a little by the presence of nearby Jupiter.

Confirmed location with Voyager map. There is an arc of three bright stars ENE of the cluster that offers a useful finding reference for this cluster. At 98x this cluster was of moderate size and sparsely populated. I performed a rough count of the members, and could see about 20 stars with direct vision, and averted vision resolved a few more and gave a hint of added density. The overall shape of the cluster was a sort of an irregular rectangle.

At 98x this cluster seemed to be a close cousin to NGC2311, observed just before, as it was about the same size and similarly populated. It is located directly west of a rather bright field star, and there is clump of field stars to the SSW of the cluster (perhaps illuminating the Seagull Nebula, which I forgot to examine). The shape was an irregular loose oval. I counted about 30 members resolved directly, and averted vision picked up a few more.

At 98x this cluster was larger than the previous two Monoceros clusters just observed, and also more populated. The lucida is a very bright star (perhaps not an official member) that sits just south of the center of the cluster. The cluster is irregularly organized, as there are gaps between areas of dense population. Just east of the lucida is an apparent double star with equally bright components. There is another nearby star pair just north of the first double, also with equally bright components. A nice, bright, well-populated cluster.

This was an extremely low altitude view, about 13 degrees, and I switched to the 4” Borg refractor to get above the south wall of my observatory. I was able to find the precise location of the cluster using a map and keying off of some bright nearby field stars. I obtained a somewhat dim view of the cluster, which was rather large. I could resolve about 25 members with direct vision, and averted vision gave a hint of additional richness but did not seem to add to the count. The stars that I could resolve were arranged in an elongated pattern.

I first viewed this with my Borg refractor at 53x, and it appeared as a small fuzzy patch, and averted vision showed additional richness. But, I was able to get at least a portion of the Obsession’s mirror above the south wall to get a better view at 98x. It appeared as a compact, moderate-sized cluster with roughly 50 resolved stars. There was no particular shape to the star mass, as the boundary appeared irregular.

At 98x this Planetary Nebula was obviously nonstellar. Although this observation was made at about 14 degrees altitude, I was able to get a reasonable view at 363x as the seeing was quite steady by now. This is a lovely object. It is moderately sized, with a bluish tint. I could not see the central star, but the center of the nebula was very bright and condensed and yielded to a fainter and elongated halo. The axis of elongation was approximately SW-NE. I tried an OIII filter, but it did not improve the view.

At 98x, this was a large, circular cluster with about 60 members resolved. All members seemed of comparable brightness. There is an attractive apparent double star SW of the cluster, with components of equal brightness, and the axis connecting the stars points in the direction of the cluster. Nice.

Another low altitude view (about 14 degrees) and probably 50% of my mirror was obstructed. At 98x, this is another large grouping of stars located SSW of a conspicuous triangle of bright field stars. The cluster had a clumpy character, with a well-populated arc of stars sitting near the center of the mass. The arc seemed to extend roughly N-S. I could see about 40-50 members of the cluster, and averted vision hinted at greater richness.

Extremely low altitude view (about 9 degrees), and so I used the Borg refractor to get above (barely) the south wall. The cluster is located north of a prominent E-W arc of three bright stars. At this altitude and aperture, the cluster only appeared as a very faint fuzzy patch, best seen with averted vision. With patience, I was able see that the haze was granular and I could resolve a handful of stars.

An enticing cluster. I spotted it at 98x, but increased the power to 212x due to its small size. The cluster’s appearance was interesting. There is a compact rectangular mass of roughly 30 stars, and just south of this mass there is an A-shaped arrangement of stars that suggests a hat (or roof) on top of the mass. So, overall, the cluster gave the impression of a house or perhaps a squat Christmas tree. In total I could resolve about 50-60 stars. Nice.

At 12 degrees altitude, requiring use of the Borg refractor. This cluster was not difficult to find, and at 53x it appeared as a rectangular mass of some 20 stars. Rather sparsely populated, and averted vision only picked up a few more members.

Observed at 10 degrees altitude with Borg refractor (53x). I had a little difficulty locating this at first, but eventually zeroed-in and confirmed with my map. It is a small cluster and seemed a little elongated. I was only able to resolve a handful of stars, but additional richness was suggested with averted vision. Otherwise, there was not much to see with small aperture at such a low altitude.

Observed at about 11 degrees altitude with the Borg refractor (53x). This is another small cluster, similar in size to the previous one (NGC2567). I spotted the cluster just SE of a conspicuous arc of reasonably bright field stars. The cluster is small, with three prominent stars within, two of which were quite bright and formed a nice pair in the center of the cluster. Altogether I could only resolve a handful of stars, and averted vision did not significantly alter this total.

Back to the Obsession, but very low in the sky at about 17 degrees altitude. At 212x, this galaxy is obviously elongated, seemingly an edge-on spiral. The core was a little brighter than the halo, but overall this galaxy was not as bright as I expected, possibly due to the low altitude and the auroral brightening of my sky. There are several nearby field stars on either side of the long axis in close proximity.

Back to the Borg refractor (53x) for this 10 degrees altitude view. I found this cluster to the SW of three bright stars forming an isosceles triangle, the brightest being Zeta Pixidis (magnitude 4.88). The cluster appeared as a moderate-sized hazy glow that was unresolved with direct vision. Averted vision allowed me to resolve a few stars, but otherwise the cluster was just a misty glow.

This is a failed attempt to see this variable nebula. I was unable to see this nebula at all. In fact, I was unable to see PV Cephei, which illuminates this nebula. I tried different eyepieces and even a UHC filter, but no luck. The AAVSO chart for PV Cep gives a minimum of magnitude 18, so it is quite possible that it was very faint.

A difficult group, especially with a less than optimal sky. I surveyed the group at 212x. The brightest member was NGC7768, which was just a small hazy glow, with some prominent field stars to the E and SE. Just south from there, I could see a tiny fuzzy point which my map shows as NGC7767. That was all I could see in this region of the cluster. I panned around looking for other members, and to the SW of the NGC7768/7767 duo, I was able to see UGC12792, which was visible with averted vision as a very faint glow. Slewing to the NNW, I also was able to see UGC12785, which was visible with direct vision and had an elongated halo. Also, I picked up one additional galaxy just to the NW of UGC12785, which was just north of a small 4-star keystone asterism. This galaxy is PGC72438, which I could only see with averted vision as a fuzzy point of light.

I toured this group at 212x. I began with NGC7631, which is east of the main galaxies and just SE of a small equilateral triangle star asterism. NGC7631 was visible with direct vision, but faint, with an elongated halo and a little brighter core. From there, I slewed westward to the main pair of galaxies in this group. The easternmost member of the pair, NGC7626, is bright, with a prominent core and roughly circular halo. The western member, NGC7619, also had a bright core and roughly circular halo. These two galaxies were like twins, although NGC7619 seemed a little brighter. Just off the halo of NGC7619, to the SSW, I saw a tiny fuzzy spot, which is NGC7617. From here, I slewed to the north, past a bright field star, until I found NGC7623, which was visible with direct vision as a small hazy glow with a slightly brighter core. (I could not the nearby NGC7621.) Moving westward, I encountered NGC7615, which was quite a challenge to see, and appeared as only a small smudge with averted vision. From there I moved north to NGC7612, which was brighter than NGC7615; NGC7612 had a bright core with a little fuzziness around it. From there I slewed to the SSE and observed NGC7608, which was a ghostly streak only visible with averted vision. Moving to the south, I was able to pick up NGC7611, which was located NNW of a very bright field star. This galaxy had an elongated halo and a stellar nucleus. My map showed a nearby galaxy to the NW, IC5309, but I did not see it. Finally, I slewed to the SE from there to view UGC12518 and UGC12522, but neither was visible. This concluded my tour.

Observed at 363x. This was a surprisingly difficult trio, perhaps attesting to the poor transparency this evening. This trio is located near a fairly bright field star. All three galaxies were faint. NGC7530 was difficult, but visible with direct vision as a small pinpoint, and averted vision allowed me to see some haze around the point. The middle galaxy in the row, NGC7532 was the brightest, and had an elongated halo and a brighter core area. The last, NGC7534, appeared as an elongated wispy glow right next to a field star. Quite challenging.

Observed at 363x. This was another rather difficult group. The most southerly member, NGC7701, was a faint, elongated streak, best seen with averted vision. The middle member, NGC7699, was the most difficult of the three, and was only barely visible by using averted vision and slewing the scope back and forth. The last one, NGC7700, was the brightest member, visible with direct vision. It had a bright core, with a slightly elongated halo.

]]>http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2011/11/17/october-25-2011-observing-report-%e2%80%93-sun-pollution/feed/08/28/11 Observing Report – Being Alert and Being Fooledhttp://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2011/09/13/82811-observing-report-%e2%80%93-being-alert-and-being-fooled/
http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2011/09/13/82811-observing-report-%e2%80%93-being-alert-and-being-fooled/#respondTue, 13 Sep 2011 21:52:48 +0000http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/?p=54Continue reading →]]>I paid a visit to Zephyr Ridge Observatory from August 26-28, during which I had one good night of observing and one poor night that was ultimately cut short by cloud cover. It was very warm during each day, with temperatures exceeding 95° F. This resulted in pleasant overnight observing conditions.

I continued my survey of challenging planetary nebulae, and bagged a few more from my list. There were, however, some that I could not see. These are documented below, and if any of my readers have been able to see these, I would be pleased to hear from you.

My preparations for observing routinely include printing maps from Voyager software, one of several high quality planetarium programs. I find these printouts more useful than published map collections (I own Uranometria 2000.0, for example) because the field of view and stellar magnitude limits can be controlled to match the specifics of my telescope and eyepiece. These software-generated maps allow me to zero-in on the precise location of an intended target, and are especially useful – indeed, almost essential – when trying to see something at the very limit of my instrument and my eyes.

But, such maps are only as good as the data used to generate them. Take the case of He 1-3 (Henize 1-3 or PK059-01.1). In my previous observing report I stated that I was unable to see this planetary nebula, and opined that I may have been looking in the wrong place. I thought that the fault was mine, thinking that I made a mistake in interpreting my map. So, on this trip I tried once again to see this object, and spent considerable time making sure the star field I saw through the eyepiece matched that on my map. Everything seemed clear this time, and yet there was no nebula at the indicated spot on my map. But, while carefully scanning the field, I spotted something to the south of the nominal location, and after spending time examining this faint disk, I became quite convinced that I was viewing a planetary nebula, and very likely this was He 1-3. (See report below.)

The next day I did some research, and found a short article by Franco Sabbadin and Antonio Bianchini that offers evidence that He 1-3 is misidentified in the 1967 Catalogue of Galactic Planetary Nebulae by Perek and Kohoutek (whose “PK” catalog numbers are commonly used to identify such nebula).

Below is a reproduction of a portion of the map generated by Voyager software. The white arrow points to an icon for the planetary nebula, and this location agrees with the 1967 Perek and Kohoutek catalogue. The location of the nebula I saw is indicated between the two red lines, and this agrees precisely with the charts provided by Sabbadin and Bianchini in their article. The distance between the two locations is only about one arcminute, which may seem trivial, but when one is using a high power eyepiece and working hard to see something very faint, such a distance can be important. (I thank Sabbadin and Bianchini for their work.)

The white arrow indicates Voyager's location for He 1-3. The correct location is in between the red lines.

I have written to the support staff at Carina Software (makers of Voyager) to point out this error. Likewise, I sent the same information to Southern Stars, whose SkySafari software shows the same incorrect location for He 1-3.

While on the subject of misplaced nebulae, I want to highlight my report on my observation of Comet Garradd, which occurred during my second night of observing. Conditions on that night were poor, with obviously compromised transparency. Nevertheless, I enjoyed my view of the comet, which was located just west of Zeta Saggitae, a quadruple star system that appears as a double star. I was surprised by the view of the double star, as it was surrounded by what appeared to be a bright circular nebula. I was unaware of such a nebula, but I spent quite some time examining it at various magnifications. I was suspicious of an optical artifact, but it certainly seemed like a nebula, as it was quite steady through each eyepiece I tried, and remained so despite spending about a half hour looking at it. (There was no dew on my optics.) Later, I researched Zeta Saggitae and found no mention of a nebula around it, so what I saw remains a mystery. The most probable explanation is an optical artifact due to moisture content in the atmosphere or very thin loud cover.

I am an experienced observer, but I must admit this sighting had me puzzled for quite some time. Most likely I was fooled by an atmospheric trick, but if not, I hereby stake my claim for a new nebula!

Good conditions, but a little breezy during this observation. Current temperature 73F after a hot day in the upper 90s. It was easy to find the precise location for this nebula using a map from Voyager software. At 212x with no filter, I saw nothing. With the OIII, however, I could intermittently glimpse a moderate-sized disk using averted vision. I could not hold it in sight, but I saw it repeatedly, and the size of the disk seemed consistent with the approximately 0.5′ quoted in my notes. At 98x with OIII, I could also glimpse the disk, but it was easier at 212x. Gray color. Central star not seen. Elusive, but visible.

Observed at 363x. Using a map from Voyager software, I was very clear about the field. The key is a very tight double star, with components of equal magnitude, located just north of the PN. (For reference, there is a field star very close to the double to the east.) My map showed the PN about 2 or 3 arcminutes north of the double, located right next to a field star. I saw this field star, and OIII blinking supported that it is just a star, and there was no sign of a PN next to it. However, moving further south from there, my map showed a faint field star, and indeed I saw a faint stellar (or fuzzy stellar) object at this location without the OIII. When I inserted the OIII, the star not only remained in sight, but with averted vision I could detect a small disk, definitely nonstellar. (For reference, just to SSW of this sighting there is a tiny curving arc of three stars.) I am convinced that this is the nebula. No central star or detail – just a small disk visible with averted vision. I believe Voyager has the PN incorrectly located.

Note: Subsequent investigation revealed that I was correct. This is a link to an article that discusses the error, and the correct location shown in the article agrees with where I saw the nebula.

This is another failed attempt to see this object. I am absolutely sure I am looking in the right place, assuming Voyager has this object correctly located. I tried 212x and 363x with and without OIII, and was unable to see it.

I was unable to see this. I am sure I am in the right location, and based on my data it should be quite large. I tried 98x and 212x with and without OIII, but could only see field stars in the location (which presumably overlay the nebula), but I could not see the nebula.

I had no difficulty verifying the correct location using a map from Voyager software. The nebula is located directly north of a fairly bright star that had a row of three stars to its NNW (nice asterism). At 98x with no filter I could vaguely glimpse “something,” but it was not convincing. Inserting the OIII, I was able to detect a vague glow, fairly large, with irregular shape. I could not make out a complete disk, so possibly I am seeing only a portion of the nebula. There are field stars superimposed on the nebula, but none of these struck me as a likely central star candidate.

A failed attempt. I believe I found the correct location, and tried 98x, 212x, and 363x with and without OIII, but saw nothing. Note that Voyager did not have this object in its database, so I hand-marked the location on the map based on its coordinates.

I confirmed the location with a Voyager map. This nebula is fairly bright. At 212x it seemed slightly nonstellar, an assessment I believe is accurate despite the less than perfect seeing. At 363x I was even more convinced that it was nonstellar. I blinked an OIII, and surrounding field stars dimmed or disappeared, whereas the PN remained bright. It appeared white in color. No central star seen.

I confirmed the location with a Voyager map. At 98x with OIII filter, I could see a large glow with an irregular border, best seen with averted vision, but I could pick up part of it with direct vision. There are stars involved in the nebula, but none of these appeared to be the central star. Once found, I removed the OIII and I could glimpse part of the object, but the OIII offered clear contrast improvement. Gray color.

I was able to see this without filter at 98x, 212x, and 363x. It is somewhat faint, but visible. Adding an OIII did not offer much enhancement, so I report on the unfiltered view at 363x. This nebula is of modest size – perhaps an arcminute in diameter – and appeared elongated E-W. Central star not seen. Gray color. With averted vision, I could intermittently pick up a little mottling in the gas, mostly on the east side. There is a field star just off the west end of the nebula, and a fainter field star touching the east edge of the nebula. There is a very faint field star north of the halo, a little further out.

I found this group at 98x, and panned around the region at both 98x and 212x, and was able to see a number of very faint points of light that were likely galaxies, but which were so faint and unremarkable that I decided to spare myself the job of trying to identify each and every one. Instead I changed to 363x for close examination of the most prominent grouping within this cluster. Among these, the brightest member is NGC7720, which had a fairly faint elongated halo and a little brightening in the core. The remaining galaxies in this area were bounded on the south end by a fairly bright field star, and I could see three galaxies in the WNW direction (IC5341, PGC71987, PGC85577) from that field star, all three being extremely faint. I could also pick up two more small fuzzy patches, one just east of NGC7720 (apparently NGC7726) and the other SE of NGC7720 (IC5342), both extremely faint. So, I identified 6 members of this Abel cluster, and spotted several others. Overall, this group is difficult.

I viewed this at a very low altitude, and I believe my mirror was partially obstructed by the south wall of the observatory. But, this globular is fairly large and bright, with a loosely organized halo with a ragged perimeter that extended outward more on one side. I could resolve two dozen stars, roughly. The core seemed relatively large and loosely constructed, and I suspect this has a fairly high concentration class.

The altitude of this object was so low that I believe my mirror was mostly obstructed by the south wall of my observatory. Indeed, at first I was unable to see this galaxy at all, so I decided to wait while it slowly raised higher (it was nearing transit) and more of my mirror was exposed to the light. Finally, I was able to see it, although it was a dim view. I saw a large, extremely faint, elongated hazy patch. Best seen with averted vision. There is a field star to the NE, and NNW of that field star is an apparent double, with a bright primary and fainter secondary.

8/27/2011 10:16 PMC/2009 P1 Comet Garradd Comet Sge

Not a good sky this evening. Some clouds and a threat of more to come. Visible stars are not “popping.” Milky Way is visible, but seems muted. Nevertheless, I was able to see this comet without difficulty, and it is bright and beautiful. It was located just west of Zeta Sagittae, and both fit into the field of view at 212x. It has a bright, compact nucleus with a large, roughly circular halo around the core. Averted vision revealed a faint extension of the halo to the south. Zeta Sagittae, a quadruple system, appeared as a double star, with a bright primary and much fainter secondary. Curiously, the double was surrounded by a large circular region of nebulosity that appeared separate and distinct from the comet. It was quite obvious and striking, but subsequent research showed no nebula around this double. I suspect I may have seen an optical artifact due to moisture content or a thin cloud. Strange, as I spent considerable time on this, and the glow did not change during the time of my observation, with the exception of a 10 minute period during which everything was obscured by a passing cloud.

Still fighting clouds, but this area of the sky was relatively OK. At 363x I could see a line of four galaxies from SW to NE, ordered in this direction in decreasing brightness. The first, and brightest, is NGC6211. It is still rather faint, with a slightly elongated halo and some core brightening. Moving to the NE, the next is NGC6213, visible with direct vision as just a faint smudge. Continuing in the same direction, I saw PGC58783 in between two field stars. It was only visible with averted vision as a very faint fuzzy spot. Finally, continuing to the NE, I saw another tiny faint fuzzy spot, which I identified as PGC58802.

At 363x I could see several members of this group. The brightest was NGC6338, which had a moderate-sized, slightly elongated halo, and brighter, compact core. Just to the north of this galaxy, I picked up a small fuzzy spot in between the main galaxy and a close pair of field stars. This was PGC59943, which also seemed to have a stellar nucleus. From there, I moved southward and saw NGC6345, which is a tiny hazy spot with a stellar pinpoint in the center. Very near this, to the south, is NGC5346, which was just a tiny, faint smudge. Returning to NGC6338, and moving SE from there, there is a row of three field stars, with the middle star being the faintest. I was able to see a faint patch of light in between the faint middle field star and the last (brighter) field star to the SE. I identified this as IC1252. I concluded my tour with this galaxy, even though my map showed a few more (probably very faint, if visible) PGC galaxies in the area.

A faint group, observed at 363x, and clouds interfered with the observation for one brief period. The first member I encountered was NGC6463, which was quite faint, visible with direct vision and averted vision revealed a little core brightening with a stellar nucleus suspected. To the east of this galaxy, I could pick up three galaxies, all extremely faint, forming a small triangle. These were apparently NGC6470, 6471, and 6472. I was only barely able to detect these as small fuzzy patches, and each seemed to have a stellar nucleus. There is a faint field star to the SE of NGC6471, and I could intermittently glimpse another faint spot which may have been NGC6477. Overall, this is quite a difficult group, made more so by the deteriorating sky this evening.

I was able to find the precise location of this cluster using a map from Voyager software. I was able to see a hazy cloud of light at this location. I could discern two distinct galaxy cores in this cloud, and a third was glimpsed intermittently with averted vision. I could not pinpoint the fourth member, and the view of the galaxies I could detect were so faint that I was not able to reliably identify which of the three members I saw.

]]>http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2011/09/13/82811-observing-report-%e2%80%93-being-alert-and-being-fooled/feed/07/31/11 Observing Report – A Survey of Broken Starshttp://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2011/08/03/73111-observing-report-%e2%80%93-a-survey-of-broken-stars/
http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/2011/08/03/73111-observing-report-%e2%80%93-a-survey-of-broken-stars/#commentsWed, 03 Aug 2011 17:33:37 +0000http://www.blog.deepskyguy.com/?p=52Continue reading →]]>I have recently returned from three superb nights at Zephyr Ridge Observatory, where I was treated to crystal clear and generally steady skies.

In my last post I mentioned that dedicated visual observers often push the limit of their eyes and telescope aperture, regardless of how much aperture one has. This trip was very much about doing just that, and my particular focus – aside from a few exceptions to provide variety – was a selection of challenging planetary nebulae.

The term “planetary nebula” was coined by the famous observer William Herschel, and it is a confusing misnomer as these objects have nothing at all to do with planets. Herschel observed the nebula NGC7009 and the small round nebula looked to him like a planetary disk, and so the class of objects known as planetary nebulae came to be. We now know that such a nebula is the result of end-stage physical processes occurring within a star that result in the expulsion of a portion of the stellar material. The material is driven outward, and the remnant star generally becomes a white dwarf, the so-called central star of the nebula.

The summer sky in the northern hemisphere has some fine examples of planetary nebulae, with M27, the Dumbbell Nebula, and M57, the Ring Nebula, being the most prominent. I have enjoyed these objects many times in my observing experience, and have even glimpsed the difficult central star of the Ring Nebula on more than one occasion. But, on this trip I came prepared with a list of planetary nebulae that I knew would test my eyes and my 20” aperture. Some of these objects were kindly provided to me by Ted Forte, the chairman of the Planetary Nebula Club of the Astronomical League. I added two dozen more to his list from my own research, and over three nights I managed to observe most of the combined list.

It was a rewarding experience to attempt these challenging objects. My report will seem at times like a broken record as descriptions like difficult, tiny, barely seen, only seen with averted vision, intermittently visible, and the ultimate failed to see it at all seem to repeat over and over. Yet, each of these planetary nebulae contributed to the overall experience for me in its own unique way, and I feel a sense of accomplishment in seeing so many of these “broken stars.”

I mention two highlights. The first is that I was able to successfully observe Pease 1, the well known and challenging planetary nebula located within the fine globular cluster M15 in Pegasus. I first attempted this observation in 2009, but failed to see it. This time I succeeded, and it was quite a surprise to see the bright pinpoint of light blaring from an unresolved mass of stars near the globular’s core, thanks to the magic of an OIII filter and steady seeing.

While being able to see a planetary nebula within a globular cluster may be an observing pinnacle for most amateur astronomers, Pease 1 was actually not the most difficult object I attempted on this trip. I am not sure which I would choose as the most challenging of the bunch, but in my report below I do note several cases of objects that I could not see at all. I will try those again some day; as with Pease 1, a second attempt may prove successful.

A far less challenging but very impressive sight was the beautiful Iris Nebula, NGC7023, in Cepheus. Since this nebula has a very bright, centrally located star, I can imagine how someone could mistake this for an exceptional planetary nebula with an obviously visible central star. However, this is not the case; the centrally located star is quite young and quite in tact, and is merely illuminating the cloud around it. The Iris Nebula is therefore a so-called reflection nebula. This one is well worth attempting for those with at least moderate aperture telescopes.

I follow with my observing logs. I hope these will inspire you to try to see some of these offbeat planetary nebulae. If not, there are plenty of brighter ones to contemplate, including the Dumbbell and Ring Nebulae. Although my report does not formally mention these, I did pay visits to each, just to enjoy their magnificence one more time. They never disappoint.

Calm and clear. Excellent seeing. Hickson 73 happened to be quite a difficult group, especially as the first observation of the evening. At 98x I was able to locate this group using a Voyager map, and immediately detected a small glow in the field. I switched to 363x. There is a fairly bright field star, with a fainter one 3 or 4 arcminutes to the east. In between these, I saw a hazy patch of light with direct vision (NGC5829), but it was quite faint, and even with averted vision I could not see any central condensation or discernible shape to the halo. Just to the NNW of this galaxy, I was able to barely pick up a small fuzzy patch that is IC4526, which was intermittent with averted vision. My map showed other members of the group nearby, but I was unable to see them. I also slewed further away to the north to see if I could detect PGC1690334, which was shown on my map, but I failed to see anything in the indicated location.

This group was not as difficult as Hickson 73, observed just before, but it was still challenging. At 363x, the largest and brightest member was NGC5754, which presented as a faint circular glow with a brighter core and a stellar nucleus. Just to the west of this galaxy, I could intermittently see with averted vision a small point of light, which I identified as NGC5752. Quite difficult. Moving to the NNE of NGC5754 there is a faint field star, and just NW of this star I saw another small, faint patch of light which is NGC5755. Also very faint, but once found I could see it with direct vision. There is also a tiny point of light just to the NW of this galaxy, which was extremely faint and intermittent with averted vision. This is NGC5753. My map showed two more galaxies separated from this main group to the south, and these two galaxies are located in between two prominent field stars, making them easy to locate. These were PGC2131540 and PGC2130996. Unfortunately, I was not able to see these galaxies. So, I saw four members of the group, NGC5754 being the brightest, followed by NGC5755.

I obtained good views of this nebula at 212x and 363x, but could pick up the field stars more easily at 363x. At 363x, this nebula is visible without a filter. It is a small disk, located in the middle of a group of field stars, with a clump of 4 stars just to the WNW and 3 stars just to the ESE, with two of these seeming to touch the edge of the nebula, one of which is quite faint. The nebula itself is visible without filter as a small circular disk, gray in color. Central star not visible. I tried both OIII and UHC filters, and preferred the UHC. With this filter in place, the contrast was improved so that the edge of the nebula was more clearly demarcated. Only two of the aforementioned field stars were still visible with the filter in place. A rewarding object.

Quite difficult. I used a Voyager software map to verify the precise position. Without filter, I could see nothing at 98x and 212x. With OIII filter, at 98x I could intermittently discern with averted vision a very faint disk of moderate size. It was elusive, but I saw it repeatedly. I switched to 212x and OIII, and was unable to see it with this combination. So, I switched back to 98x and noticed that the field stars seemed a tiny bit dimmer, so I believe the object – which was already at quite a low altitude in the southern sky – had dipped into a less transparent region of the sky. So, I was unable to repeat the original 98x observation. But, I am certain of my initial sighting. This object would be better seen at a more southerly latitude.

This object is challenging. I used a Voyager map to confirm the precise location. At 212x, it was not visible without filter. With an OIII filter, I saw a moderate-sized circular disk (maybe 20-40 arcseconds in diameter). I could hold it in view with averted vision once I pinpointed the location. Central star not visible.

I tried to see this, but failed. My data suggests this is rather large, so I used 98x with and without OIII, with location confirmed by a Voyager map. At times I thought I glimpsed a vague glow, but I was not convinced by the sighting, and so consider this a negative observation.

I used a Voyager software map to confirm the precise location. At this location there is a very tight row of three stars, the easternmost of which is the planetary nebula in question (according to the map). The westernmost appeared to be roughly equal brightness to the PN, whereas the middle star in the row is substantially fainter. All this is with unfiltered view at 212x. I inserted an OIII filter, and indeed the easternmost star remained quite bright, while the westernmost star dimmed substantially and the middle star disappeared altogether. So, this confirms the sighting: a stellar planetary nebula, white in color.

Viewed at 212x. This is a lovely nebula. My report is based on an unfiltered view; I tried the OIII and UHC filters, and the UHC was marginally useful, but I preferred the view without any filter. The nebula is anchored by a very bright star that is centrally located, identified as V380 Cephei, a young (5000-6000 years old) and bright star (180 solar magitudes of luminosity). The nebula is large, exhibiting a bright glow that diffuses gradually into the background so that the full extent is likely much larger than the brightest area that I could see. The shape is irregular, but it surrounds the star and seems to extend outward a little more to the west side. Using averted vision, I was able to see a prominent extension of the nebula to the south that contained a dark protrusion that entered the extension from west to east. The immediate and obvious sighting of this extension with averted vision was quite startling, as it is not apparent with direct vision. A beautiful nebula.

This planetary nebula was easy to spot without a filter. At 363x, I was able to see the central star. It is quite faint, but I could hold it for extended periods with averted vision. The nebula is fairly good-sized and circular. Three field stars hug the S-SE border of the nebula. I also detected a very faint star near the edge of the nebula to the NE. With OIII filter, there is some contrast improvement, and in particular I noted that the edge of the disk seemed rather ill-defined – not smooth and clearly demarcated.

I found this initially at 212x with OIII filter. It is located just north of a bright field star, which seems to be hugging the south edge of the nebula. At 363x I could see the nebula without the OIII using averted vision. At 363x with OIII, the view is enhanced. The nebula is elongated with the long axis oriented approximately N-S, with the field star attached to the south side of the long axis. The perimeter of the nebula is well-defined. Central star not visible. Gray color.

I navigated to the precise location using a map printed from Voyager software. At 212x and especially at 363x, the nebula appeared as a tiny nonstellar fuzzy glow, visible with direct vision and no filter, although quite faint. No central star visible. The color was gray. Inserting an OIII filter confirmed the sighting, as the nebula remained bright while surrounding stars dimmed, although strangely the filtered view seemed to diminish the extent of the disk, as the nebula seemed slightly smaller. Perhaps the outer edges of the gas do not respond well to filtration – or my eyes were playing tricks at this very late hour.

Fine conditions this night, as I began my session with this galaxy cluster. I was able to see three of the four members of this cluster. The easiest was UGC10057, which is the largest galaxy. It was faint and had uniform brightness and was slightly elongated. Just to the SSW of this galaxy there was a smaller fuzzy patch with a bright core and suspected stellar nucleus (still a little breeze blowing making the view a little jumpy). This is PGC56067. My map identifies a star superimposed on this galaxy (GSC 4412-0236), so my suspicion of a stellar pinpoint within could be this star rather than a characteristic of the nucleus of the galaxy. Returning to UGC10057 and directing attention slightly to the NE of there, I saw a tiny pinpoint that was very faint. I believe this is PGC56086, even though I could not see a hazy halo suggesting a galaxy. There is a field star shown on my map in this general direction as well, but I saw this in the field and it is located beyond where I detected the tiny pinpoint that I believe is PGC56086. The fourth member, PGC56095, was not visible.

I found this group at 212x directly south of a tight N-S oriented pair of field stars. Just south of the pair of stars I could see a hazy clump. I examined the cluster at both 212x and 363x, preferring the view at 212x. I was able to pick out three distinct concentrated areas of light amidst the very faint cloud. The two field stars point directly to two galaxies on the east side of the cloud, arranged N-S, PGC56590 and PGC56588. These appeared as two tiny fuzzy spots, with no other detail visible. I also believe I saw PGC56572, which was an intermittent point of light. PGC56577 was not visible. Note that the latter two galaxies are so close together that I may have misidentified which I was able to detect, but I believe I got it right.

I toured this group at 212x. I began in the center of my map, which showed an apparent double star, with the easternmost member being substantially brighter. To the west of this pair and heading northward, I saw at least four galaxies, all faint. The most prominent is UGC10143, the furthest north of the four faint fuzzies, which was the largest and brightest and had an elongated halo. From here I slewed to the SW where there are a number of PGC galaxies shown on my map. I was not able to see any of these, but noticed another galaxy nearby to the SE, which I identified as IC1165. IC1165 is a small circular haze, within which I intermittently glimpsed a stellar pinpoint that was off-center. My map shows IC1165B next to IC1165, but I am not sure whether I saw evidence of the companion galaxy or merely a superimposed field star. From there I slewed WNW a short distance arriving at an asterism of four stars. Just to the SW of the westernmost member of this asterism I detected a very faint point of light where galaxy PGC100398 is located according to my map. From there I slewed NNW and saw a tiny spec of light just west of a five-star asterism where PGC56838 is located. Averted vision enhanced the view of this, as I could see a little haze rather than just a point. Moving north from there, I panned around and found the precise location of galaxy PGC56781, where I could barely pick up a faint point of light that was quite elusive and unreliable. Moving north from there, I saw a small hazy patch (UGC10144) with a tiny companion patch of haze next to it (PGC56786) located NW of a bright field star. UGC10144 is definitely the brighter and larger of the two, with a small amount of central brightening. From there, I slewed westward to seek other members, but was not able to see anything else.

This is a very difficult object. It is located within a rich star field, and it took some doing to find a suitable series of asterisms to pin down the precise location, but I did succeed based on my Voyager map. At 212x without filter, I was able to barely see a “soft” star that, with averted vision, seemed to be nonstellar. Once found, I could hold it with averted vision, especially if I slowly slewed the telescope. The response to OIII filter was weak to modest. I was able to see a little more of the disk, clearly nonstellar, and the fact that the nebula stayed bright while nearby stars dimmed confirmed the finding. No color, and no central star seen.

Once again, I navigated carefully to the precise location with the help of a Voyager map. At 212x with no filter, I was able to see a small nonstellar disk that was fairly challenging. Averted vision showed the nonstellar nature much better than direct vision. Adding an OIII filter, I could see the nonstellar disk with direct vision. I also tried a UHC filter, which also improved the view, and it was similar to the OIII. I think the view with the OIII was slightly preferable. At 363x and OIII, the view was also very good. Nonstellar, gray disk. No central star was seen.

This nebula was a welcome relief from the more difficult objects I have been viewing this week. At 212x with no filter, the nebula was obvious with direct vision. It was reasonably large. At 363x and no filter, I was unable to see a central star, but there were some very faint stars on the east side of the halo, with one seemingly overlapping. The nebula was mottled with irregular perimeter. I tried 363x and 212x with both UHC and OIII filters, and preferred 212x with UHC, although the differences were slight. At 212x with UHC, the contrast was improved. The mottling was still evident, and averted vision suggested slight thinning of the gas towards the center, suggesting possible annularity. The nebula was roughly circular, although after long examination, it may be slightly stretched in the N-S direction. Overall, the brightness of the gas was not uniform, and if I had to pick, I would call the north side a little brighter than the south, but the difference is slight.

This object was not visible without OIII filter. I used 212x and found it with the help of my Voyager map, first detecting it with averted vision. It is a moderate-sized disk, easy to hold with averted vision. Once found, I could see it with direct vision, but better appreciation required averted vision. It seemed circular, and I saw no central star. There is a fairly bright field star just to the SE, which was a useful signpost for finding the nebula.

This nebula was not difficult to find, as it is located just east of a very bright star. I could barely detect a vague glow near that star at 98x with no filter, but adding the OIII brought forth the nebula more clearly. The shape was irregular and it was of moderate size; it looked more like a reflection nebula than a typical planetary nebula. There are quite a few stars involved besides the bright star just mentioned. There are three bright stars just west of the nebula, and two more to the NNE. There is another star inside the nebula, but the irregular shape of the gas and the star’s location within made me question whether this could be the central star. I increased the power to 212x, with and without filter, but the view at 98x was better.

This nebula was easy to spot at 98x and OIII filter as a small disk. I tried 212x and 363x, and I preferred 212x. At 212x I could not see it without the OIII filter. It is a roughly circular gray disk, maybe half an arcminute in diameter, with an irregular perimeter. Central star not visible.

I spotted this easily using 212x and OIII filter. It is also visible with direct vision without filter as a moderate-sized disk, although a somewhat incomplete disk as there is some thinning of the gas on one side. Central star not visible. There are two bright stars to the east, the closest just ESE of the nebula and it has a fainter companion. The other is NNE of the nebula and a little further away. With OIII filter, I saw a smooth, well-defined disk of moderate size.

I used detailed finder charts from www.blackskies.org to aid in finding this nebula. The seeing at this time was quite stable, so I could comfortably work at 500x. I followed the prescription on the charts, first finding the indicated trapezium of four stars, then star A, then star D, and finally star E. Beyond star E, the next step led to an unresolved clump of stars near the edge of the core of M15. I tried to resolve something there, but could not. But, I knew I was in the correct area to find Pease 1. So, I inserted an OIII filter and viewed the same clump of stars. Using averted vision, to my surprise, I was able to see a bright point of light within the unresolved mass (the mass itself was dimmer). It was intermittent, but I was often able to hold it in view for substantial lengths of time. I repeated the observation, by removing the filter and verifying that I could not see such a point of light within the region in question. Reinserting the OIII, I was able to verify the bright point again, and so I am confident of the sighting.

Using a map from Voyager software, it was not difficult to pinpoint the precise location of this nebula. I tried 98x with no filter, and saw nothing. Likewise at 212x. Adding an OIII filter at 212x did not help either. At 363x with no filter, I was able to detect an extremely faint stellar point at the precise location. Once I saw it with averted vision, I could hold it with direct vision. Adding an OIII filter at 363x caused the point to disappear. Likewise for the UHC. I returned to 212x, and this time I could now see the stellar point. Also, at 98x I could now intermittently see the point with averted vision. Under no circumstance was I able to discern a disk. Since I verified the location with certainty based on my map, I conclude this is a stellar planetary nebula that does not respond to narrowband filters.

This nebula is located just to the east of a small group of 8 stars. I tried various eyepiece and filter combinations, and ultimately preferred the unfiltered view at 363x, which gave a view of a very faint, gray disk that I could hold easily with averted vision and partially see with direct vision. I experienced difficulty using the OIII at 363x, as I kept losing sight of the nebula due to field drift, but I did glimpse it. So, I backed off to 212x (unfiltered), which showed a tiny disk. The OIII filter at 212x caused the 8 field stars to disappear while the nebula remained, with the disk seeming to be more focused but still nonstellar. None of the unfiltered views allowed me to see the central star.

This nebula forms a slightly crooked right triangle with two bright field stars, and is directly south of one of these. At 363x I could see it as a small, gray disk – clearly nonstellar – and visible with direct vision. Both OIII and UHC filters offered contrast improvement, but I preferred the view through the UHC. With the UHC in place, the light seemed more concentrated in the center, with the edge more diffuse. This feature was subtle, especially given the tiny disk. Central star not visible.

I had some difficulty matching my map to the view through the eyepiece, but eventually I navigated to the exact location of this nebula. At 212x it is only barely visible. At 363x I could see a small nonstellar glow, barely visible with direct vision and best seen with averted vision. It is located very close to faint field stars; I could see 4 stars just next to the nebula, approximately to the west. No central star, and the image was a ghostly gray. Inserting an OIII caused the nearby stars to disappear and offered moderate contrast improvement, but did not change my overall description.

Very difficult. I used a Voyager map to navigate to the precise location, and the nebula is just SE of a rather bright field star. With no filter at 98x, I could only see 5 field stars where the nebula is supposed to be, but there was no sign of the nebula. With the OIII at 98x, I could see a rather large and extremely faint glow of irregular shape that encompasses the aforementioned field stars. I was able to hold the glow with averted vision but could not clearly discern the shape. None of the field stars seemed likely candidates for the central star.

Very low altitude view, as I grazed the top of the south wall of my observatory. But, at 98x with OIII I could pick up this nebula right away as a large, diffuse elongated glow. The long axis is oriented NW-SE. There are some nearby field stars, including one off the NW end and another off the SE. I tried viewing it unfiltered at 98x, and could only make out an extremely faint glow. So, this is best seen with OIII, especially with averted vision although it is visible with direct vision as well. Central star not visible.

I navigated to the precise location, and found what appeared to be just a star just to the south of a very tight double star of equally bright components that I was able to split. This stellar pinpoint appears to be precisely where the nebula is located according to my map, but the map also shows that the nebula is extremely close to a field star. There are two additional stellar points to the NE which form a roughly equilateral triangle with the nebula, and all are of approximately equal brightness. Inserting an OIII at 363x resulted in all three components of this triangle to dim, so I believe the stellar point is probably just a field star and not the nebula. With the filter in place, I was unable to see any evidence of a true nebulous glow, so I conclude that I probably was not able to see He1-3 on this night.

Note: Subsequent research suggests to me that I may have misinterpreted my map and expended my visual energy in the wrong location. I will try this again some day, as I think under good conditions I should be able to see a small nonstellar object.

I had to work very hard to find this, but eventually was able to make sense of my map and the eyepiece view and navigated to the correct spot. There is a small equilateral triangle of stars of approximately equal magnitude. The nebula is located just north of the westernmost star of that triangle. I was able to glimpse it at 212x unfiltered as a small stellar point. At 363x it remained stellar and I could not hold it with direct vision, but could do so with averted vision. Inserting an OIII, I was able to intermittently glimpse a nonstellar glow, which was quite faint and elusive, but repeatedly seen. Challenging, but a reliable sighting.

Once again, I used a Voyager map to confirm the location. At 212x unfiltered I was barely able to see the nebula. At 363x, the unfiltered view was a little easier. The seeing was a little unsteady at 363x, however, so I returned to 212x. At this power, using averted vision I could see a very small fuzzy disk, which I could hold with averted vision. There is a very small formation of faint stars forming an approximate equilateral triangle, and the nebula is located just west of the easternmost member of this triangle, with the star seeming to hug the eastern edge of the perimeter of the nebula. Inserting an OIII offered slight enhancement. Central star not visible.

This nebula is not visible without the OIII filter. At 98x with OIII filter, the nebula appeared as a fairly large and approximately circular glow. It is barely detectable with direct vision, so averted vision is required to really see it. A field star is located on the eastern end of the nebula, just on the edge of the gas. Central star not visible.

This nebula is very faint and required an OIII filter to see it. It is located to the SSW of a nice four-star trapezium. At 98x with OIII, it is a large glow of ill-defined shape that I could only hold with averted vision. No central star seen.